:-) A true DVCS, no.
Does it share many of the same constructs etc, as a true DVCS? Yes. In many ways, the fact that the 'local repo' is actually a server side logical construct, is pretty much irrevalent. Jazz SCM is only a small part of the overall Jazz platform. Once you start considering that Jazz includes issue resolution, agile project management etc, I can see what and why they have done what they've done. The Jazz repository, of which the SCM stuff is only a part, contains *everything* :-) I don't belive (as is commonly said) that it is based on ClearCase UCM. In concept, probably, but when I look a AccurRev's tutorials, I may as well be looking at a ClearCase one! That said, back to SCM and DVCS, the fact that local repo is a server side construct really makes little difference (it certainly made zero difference to me, in writing the api). As, the thinking behind the pull/push, accept/deliver is the same. Jazz also supports multiple flow targets. So, can deliver to more than one repo in the one operation. I'm not sure if git, et. al., offer the same. All of that said, the devs who have used it have mostly liked the scm side - once they got used to it - it took me about a month to have me "ah ha!" moment. :-) The thing that they really really liked, is the workflow around that. The agile based issue management, being implicity tried back tinto the source etc. So, in many ways I do think of it as ClearQuest enabled UCM Clearcase, at least in concept. Which in reality, is all the same, as they all borrow/steal from each other. That said, I still prefer SVN (though, it could well be a comfort answer here... <G>), it's easy. It's simple. It's easily understood! And in some case (this can be THE most important decision), it's easy to get resources who understand it! -Chris On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 10:10 AM, Barrie Treloar <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 6:58 PM, Chris Graham <[email protected]> wrote: > > "It is then your choice when you want to update your working copy with > the > > changes you just fetched." > > > > :-) That would be the merge then. > > > > Git pull = fetch + merge. > > > > Interestingly enough, Jazz doesn't let you do that; in that is does not > > separate the fetch and merge. > > > > When you accept from another Stream or Repository Workspace, you do it > into > > your (or any specified, really) Workspace. > > > > Your working copy, (sandbox in Jazz terms) is automatically updated with > > the results of the accept, if there is a sandbox that has been loaded > > (checkout in svn terms) associated with that workspace. > > (Completely ignorant assumptions follow :) > That's probably because Jazz is not a distributed version control system > (DVCS). > i.e. git and mercurial have a *complete* repository on every location > where a checkout has occurred. > Jazz is probably based off of ClearCase UCM which is also not a DVCS. > > So that means your working copy reflects what stream you pulled down > from the server. > And the only way to switch that work is to contact the server again. > DVCS has the version control files for everything locally, so you can > work disconnected *yay* and switch branches, etc without needing a > network connection. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
